Slashdot Mirror
France Moving Forward on Legalized P2P
Romerican writes "Over a month ago, Slashdotters joked about France's efforts to legalize P2P. Originally dismissed as a trivial coup by a small group, the French government continues to entertain the topic. News.com is reporting the French Minister of Culture will advocate P2P as a flat-fee service." From the article: "The draft law, which originally aimed to tackle online piracy, is backed by consumer groups in France but heavily opposed by such companies as Vivendi Universal, which owns Universal Music, the world's biggest record company, and a stake in film and TV company NBC Universal. French cinema and music trading associations together with rock stars such as Johnny Hallyday have spoken out against the law, arguing it would kill their work. "
Free p2p sounds great and all, but what's to stop the fee collecting agency from discriminating against artists in the disbursement of the funds?
I think with all the contraversy about p2p -- I think want should be done is that the US government spend a couple million/billion and work with people in providing a free online libary and a free place where people can show off their work if they want. It would be considered P2P because that would be nessesary for that much storage and the government wouldnt have to buy tons and tons of servers because its p2p. Thoughts? I know it has flaws but I just thought of it. -Jonny
The length of a
I believe it has been stastistically shown (take that with as much salt as you like) that if everyone pays a flat fee, and Nielsen-box equivalents are used, the Entertainment Industry would actually make more money by allowing unlimited downloads via any medium than they get through current means.
In other words, well done the French.
I get my music and movies for free right now. Why would anyone support this?
In our northern province of Ontario, Canada. A few years back they decided that it was ok for women to go topless, as long as it wasnt sexual. Men can take off their shirts, so know women can too. Now of course the right-wingers were freaking out. We'd hear that these women would be walking through downtown with no shirts on.. and that the kids would be exposed to it. Not too mention the idea that all these women are going to be raped, not too mention the locusts. Now, none of this has come to pass. This is also the same rhetoric spwed over gay--marriage. Who cares?? Somehow they get all upset when they get married. Somehow they think that their rights are being violated. Not to mention the locuts, and that churches would be forced to marry these folks..Have I mentioned the Locusts ? We also have a system in place that allows the governement to collect a tax on blank cds.. (works out to maybe a nickel a cd maybe?). What that is supposed to do is go into the Canadian Musicians, that work hard to earn that. The idea is that they can go after copyrights here, because they are making some money there. There is another argumnet too be made about how little money the artists are making. The noises that the music industry is making because that is all they know. No matter how much you try to guide their hands they react out of the fear of the unknown. Maybe they need better terms in the contract over how the industry pays out these 'monthly' fees. Thats the big 'white elephant in the room' as it were. How do you determine the scale? Its a great idea, but thats what scares them. The idea of deciding who gets what is a big new thing. Of course the artist are afraid because tey think that they will get any of the money that will come from that. Anyone remember Courtney Love and her lawsuit?: She was filing after they got all that money from napster and others "in the name of the artists"? Nobody ever got dime. Did anyone see the locusts yet ?
I have mod points and I am not afraid to use them.
What happens when a normal company's business model no longer works due to new technology or social/economical changes? You adapt or go under. What happens when a massively powerful organization's business model starts to fail like the RIAA or MPAA (or whatever else their respective counterparts in other countries are called)? They sue the pants off as many people as it takes to stop the change. Well not only are they hindering the advancement of technology they are attacking their customer base. Remember what happened to Napster - they turned "legal" and started offering a pay-per service. That is called adaption, it is what makes companies stand out from the rest. Maybe this specific proposal going on in France is not the most ideal method to go about but it, but that is not why there is opposition to it. They are opposing it because it will remove power and influence and force these companies to adapt, or more hopefully go away. They are against the fundamental principals not the methods.
As for the argument of the artists losing money, etc. Well guess what, you're in the same boat. Adapt or learn a new skill. The internet is NOT going away any time soon and the entire purpose of the internet is to SHARE IDEAS. Guess what, your artwork is just an idea. If people want to share your idea with others then you should be glad, you are appreciated.
I don't mean to sound cruel as I am not NOT giving the bird to anyone who complains. I understand some people are losing money but it is not the fault of P2P. It is the people who are not paying for the product/service when they should be. If by some miracle P2P becomes extraordinarily unusable legally or technically, something else more grandios will emerge. Sharing stuff on the internet will never stop. Get used to it.
ZERO ZERO ONE ZERO ONE ZERO ONE ONE! Just brushing up for my next big invention: Ethernet over Voice (EoV)
Declaring certain protocols to be "illegal" is silly enough (just like the April Fool's joke of the "evil bit" and the CP80 project that requires labelling all p0rn traffic), but then they propose slapping a flat-fee on it, essentially saying, "We don't want you to do it, but we realize we can't stop you. So we'll at least try and make some money off you."
Ridiculous.
There is a growing class of people that the only thing stopping them from throwing pre-existing samples together and coming out with a pretty decent mix is the current music industry legislative mess. The scare they put into people prevents some from even trying.
Well said.
There's a statue of Benjamin Franklin in Paris, not too far where I live. Here's what written on it: "The genius who freed America and shed torrents of light upon Europe. The sage whom two worlds claimed as their own."
That's how we French like to joke about the US, sometimes.
"/.ers just don't get it."
Slashdotters get "it" far more than the rest of the world. RMS types have been thinking philosophically about this issue long before the average person even heard of the term "stealing IP" and "piracy" from Time Warner and Co. Someone that even uses the term "stealing" has been clearly co-opted since their source of information is in a conflict of interest. I don't fault you-- but I will if you don't learn when faced with the facts.
This matter went before the supreme court decades ago and in every legal sense the courts realized that it is different than stealing since the original work never goes missing. Perhaps "copyright infringement" is wrong. Perhaps "patent infrindgement" is wrong. However it is NOT STEALING.
What you should be asking yourself at this moment though is-- why are you being manipulated by the media if their case is so just?
I used to be just like you too. Self-righteous in my belief that it was "wrong". When I realized I was being manipulated by words-- I dug deeper till I reached the point where I realized something.
If copyright/patent infringement can be maintained in certain areas that don't supercede our existing rights--- then that's fine (e.g. medical patents, industrial design..physical manifestations). Unfortunately because of the Internet it has become apparent where film, software and music are concerned, protecting IP cannot be done without creation of an "information police". Anything you don't track on the Internet will instantly become the avenue of choice for P2P filesharing. Therefore it would require everything to be examined.
Just saying that s scary. (adds even more fuel to what the government is already doing)
Art can survive in a (mostly) free information society--- but will we survive a society that polices and monitors all free expression (even if it's verbatim)?
Laughing is good for you - so continue. In the meantime your missing something or perhaps I am , but it seems to me that while the RIAA are suing unborn babies in America (the land of the free), we still have the right to P2P here in France.
How many beans make five, anyhow ?